https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82006
--- Comment #7 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Any progress on this?
Yeah, I have no exact analysis yet, but the issue is caused by Richards commit
r251220. I wonder how this can cause the tcl errors.
I will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64972
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Emrich ---
Issue exists for target x86_64-w64-mingw32 too.
By the way, this is a regression.
At the moment gcc doesn't build for the *-w64-mingw32 targets.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64972
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> And the suggested fix is just to cast to unsigned long and use %ld or %lx
> instead of %zd and %zx. I can't test it on these targets, so it is better
> if somebo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64972
--- Comment #7 from Rainer Emrich ---
Ok, here's the additional issue in oacc-parallel.c.
libtool: compile:
/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.UotBZukqBt/gcc-5.0.0/gcc-5.0.0/./gcc/xgcc
-B/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.UotBZukqBt/gcc-5.0.0/gcc-5.0.0/./gcc/
-L/opt/d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64972
--- Comment #8 from Rainer Emrich ---
I'm testing the following on x86_64-w64-mingw32 at the moment.
Index: oacc-parallel.c
===
--- oacc-parallel.c (Revision 221607)
+++ oacc-pa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Created attachment 35125
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35125&action=edit
ada sources
That's a regression in gcc 5. Used to work at least until end of October last
year. L
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Running the testsuite I get ICEs for lto in several places, but the ICE is
always the same:
lto1.exe: internal compiler error: in
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Running the gcc testsuite I get this ICE:
Executing on host:
/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.5jnZ8G4weh/gcc-5.0.0/gcc-5.0.0/gcc/xgcc
-B/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Running the gcc testsuite I get the folowing ICE:
Executing on host:
/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.5jnZ8G4weh/gcc-5.0.0/gcc-5.0.0
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Executing on host:
/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.5jnZ8G4weh/gcc-5.0.0/gcc-5.0.0/gcc/xgcc
-B/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.5jnZ8G4weh/gcc-5.0.0/gcc
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Running the gcc testsuite I get the following ICE:
Executing on host:
/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Executing on host:
/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.5jnZ8G4weh/gcc-5.0.0/gcc-5.0.0/gcc/xgcc
-B/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.5jnZ8G4weh/gcc-5.0.0/gcc-5.0.0/gcc/
/opt
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Running the g++ testsuite I get the following ICE:
Executing on host:
/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.5jnZ8G4weh/gcc-5.0.0/gcc-5.0.0/gcc/testsuite/g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #1)
> Yeah, I noticed such failures too.
> AFAI researched them, they are related to out-of-stack issues.
>
> The problem seems to be that within lto a lot of vec-s are pa
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Running g++ testsuite I get the following ICE:
Executing on host:
/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.5jnZ8G4weh/gcc-5.0.0/gcc-5.0.0/gcc/testsuite/g++1
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Running the g++ testsuite I get the following ICE:
Executing on host:
/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.5jnZ8G4weh/gcc-5.0.0/gcc-5.0.0/gcc/testsuite/g
NCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Runnning the testsuites I see a real lot of FAILs like the following.
Executing on host:
/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.4bOnj9XWJa/gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Running the testsuites I get lot of FAILs, UNRESOLVED with another lto issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65582
Rainer Emrich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|testsuite lto issue:|[5 Regression] testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65581
Rainer Emrich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|testsuite lto issue:|[5 Regression] testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65581
--- Comment #3 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Can you try reducing to a minimal example? it would seem that int main() {
> return 0; } should already fail this way?
test.c:
int main()
{
return 0;
}
Ins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65582
--- Comment #3 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Huh, can you reproduce that with an installed compiler? It seems to simply
> build a single source file with -flto. Maybe it's some issue with dir
> separators
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65582
--- Comment #4 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Rainer Emrich from comment #3)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> > Huh, can you reproduce that with an installed compiler? It seems to simply
> > build a single source file with -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65561
--- Comment #4 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #3)
> Rainer, the failure doesn't trigger for me on crosscompiler from
> x86_64-linux-gnu. Can you please check if the attached patch fixes the
> failure for you?
I will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65581
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #4)
> This issue is related to building of crt. so it doesn't have something to do
> with gcc's lto in first hand.
That leaves the question, why on earth is this only expo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65561
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #3)
> Rainer, the failure doesn't trigger for me on crosscompiler from
> x86_64-linux-gnu. Can you please check if the attached patch fixes the
> failure for you?
ICE is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65581
--- Comment #7 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #6)
> As far as I understand this issue does LTO now handle stuff used from object
> file different to prior versions. I add Jan. He might be able to give us
> some more p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65581
--- Comment #9 from Rainer Emrich ---
Created attachment 35210
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35210&action=edit
Test case including temporaries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65581
--- Comment #10 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #8)
> Hmm, is it still a problem and if so, why it is marked as resolved/invalid?
>
> crtbegin/crtend should be compiled without LTO even with LTO bootstrap.
> Can you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65581
--- Comment #12 from Rainer Emrich ---
Created attachment 35218
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35218&action=edit
Test case compiled without -flto.
This without -flto.
By the way ld is:
GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.25.51.2015032
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65581
--- Comment #14 from Rainer Emrich ---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 03.04.2015 01:31, schrieb hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org:
> --- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka --- the
> compiled code (test.s) is identical to what LTO path prod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65581
--- Comment #15 from Rainer Emrich ---
Bug report opened for ld.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18199
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Emrich ---
Created attachment 35237
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35237&action=edit
reproducer with temporaries
$ gcc fprintf.c fprintf-lib.c main.c -fno-diagnostics-show-caret
-fdiagnostics-colo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65581
--- Comment #16 from Rainer Emrich ---
Indeed this seems to be a linker bug in ld on binutils head.
Doesn't reproduce with binutils 2.25.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65582
--- Comment #6 from Rainer Emrich ---
Created attachment 35238
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35238&action=edit
compile temporaries and compile log.
$ gcc -v
/opt/devel/gnu/src/gcc-mingw-w64/gcc-5.0.0/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #7 from Rainer Emrich ---
Created attachment 35239
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35239&action=edit
reproducer with temporaries and verbose gcc output
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #9 from Rainer Emrich ---
Created attachment 35244
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35244&action=edit
reproducer with temporaries and verbose gcc output including -Wl,-debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #10 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> Unfortunately -Wl,-debug is missing ;)
Ok, I uploaded a version including -Wl,-debug
>
> It would be interesting to see the lto-wrapper invocation (is there s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #12 from Rainer Emrich ---
Created attachment 35245
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35245&action=edit
yet another more verbose reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #13 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> Ok, the ld invocation still looks correct. For some reason we don't see the
> debug output from lto-wrapper or the linker plugin. Ah - it looks for '-v',
> s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #20 from Rainer Emrich ---
Kai,
(In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #18)
> Does the following patch fixes your problem?
>
> Index: lto-wrapper.c
> ===
> --- lto-wrapper
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65582
Rainer Emrich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #21 from Rainer Emrich ---
*** Bug 65582 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #25 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #24)
> Note that the issue should only cause option merging to be skipped for files
> in archives (and that, too, on x86_64-linux). Though compared to the 4.9
> bran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #26 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Rainer Emrich from comment #25)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #24)
> > Note that the issue should only cause option merging to be skipped for files
> > in archives (and that, too, o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #29 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Matt Breedlove from comment #28)
> If you don't mind, what were the failures you were getting on this one or
> did the original reported errors simply return?
The failures are different now, fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #30 from Rainer Emrich ---
I'm testing the following instead:
Index: gcc/lto-wrapper.c
===
--- gcc/lto-wrapper.c (Revision 222611)
+++ gcc/lto-wrapper.c (Arbeitskopi
NCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Target Milestone: ---
Bootstrapping trunk revision 227528, native x86_64-w64-mingw32, I get:
g++ -std=gnu++98 -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67546
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #1)
> I added to mingw-w64's libwinpthread a work-a-round for this sloopy code in
> libgomp. Nevertheless issue should be fixed IMO in libgomp, too
Wrong PR, this belongs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67363
Rainer Emrich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67546
Rainer Emrich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67363
--- Comment #20 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to İsmail Dönmez from comment #18)
> (In reply to John David Anglin from comment #17)
> > Fixed on hppa*-*-hpux*.
>
> Also fixes mingw-w64, thank you!
Confirmed, bootstraps on native x84_64-w64-m
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Target Milestone: ---
I get a lot of new failures for the tr1/5_numerical_facilities test cases of
the libstdc++ testsuite compared to a gcc trunk version
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
Rainer Emrich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #29 from Rainer Emrich ---
Am 10.02.2015 12:12, schrieb jakub at gcc dot gnu.org:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
>
> --- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg02137.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #31 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #30)
> Yes, this patch slipped under my radar. It would be good if you - Rainer -
> would have pinged on it. As far as I recalled I awaited at that time a full
> patch b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #11 from Rainer Emrich ---
Dear friends this issue seems to become a never ending story.
In my understanding the person causing the issue is responsible for a fix.
There are several hints in this thread how to solve the issue. So plea
: gcov-profile
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Bootstrap fails:
g++ -c -g -DIN_GCC-fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -fasynchronous-unwind-tables
-W -Wall -Wno-narrowing -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wno-format
-Wmissing-format-attribute
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #3 from Rainer Emrich ---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 23.07.2014 17:17, schrieb ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org:
> --- Comment #2 from Kai Tietz --- Yes, issue is
> here that ftw API is used for cleanup.
>
> ... stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #8 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to xur from comment #7)
> OK. I'll fix this and submit another patch.
What is the status for that?
>
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 11:26 AM, ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
> wrote:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
--- Comment #9 from Rainer Emrich ---
Created attachment 33548
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33548&action=edit
Proposed patch to fix the mingw case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68514
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Emrich ---
I'm starting bootstrap and testsuite run at the moment, will take some hours.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68514
--- Comment #3 from Rainer Emrich ---
Will take more time, trunk doesn't bootstrap atm. I have to investigate.
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Target Milestone: ---
gcc 6.0 rev. 232071
binutils-2.25.1
fails in stage 1 at linking of libstdc++-6.dll:
libtool: link:
/opt/devel/SCRATCH
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68514
--- Comment #4 from Rainer Emrich ---
Revison 232071 broke bootstrap on x86_64-w64-mingw32, see bug 69440.
I can't test until trunk bootstraps again for x86_64-w64-mingw32.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68514
--- Comment #6 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> (In reply to Rainer Emrich from comment #4)
> > Revison 232071 broke bootstrap on x86_64-w64-mingw32, see bug 69440.
> > I can't test until trunk bootstraps again
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66655
--- Comment #25 from Rainer Emrich ---
I'm testing rev. 232815, proposed patch applied, on x86_64-w64-mingw32 atm.
Will take some time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66655
--- Comment #27 from Rainer Emrich ---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Am 26.01.2016 um 10:30 schrieb nickc at gcc dot gnu.org:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66655
>
> --- Comment #26 from Nick Clifton --- Hi
>
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Target Milestone: ---
Two examples from about 300 in gnat/sso:
Setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH to
Priority: P3
Component: jit
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Target Milestone: ---
> FAIL: test-accessing-struct.c.exe killed: 29233 exp10 0 0 CHILDKILLED SIGSEGV
> {segmentation violation}
> FAIL: test-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69490
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Emrich ---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Am 26.01.2016 um 15:50 schrieb dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69490
>
> --- Comment #1 from David Malcolm
> ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66014
Rainer Emrich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
--- Comment
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Target Milestone: ---
Since gcc-5 I get a lot of fortran testsuite failures. Most of these with IO
involved and causing a timeout. This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66861
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Emrich ---
I suspect the following commit causing the issue:
215307:
File size: 43008 byte(s)
PR libfortran/62768 Handle filenames with embedded null characters.
testsuite ChangeLog:
2014-09-17 Janne Blomqvist
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66861
--- Comment #4 from Rainer Emrich ---
Am 13.07.2015 um 20:56 schrieb jb at gcc dot gnu.org:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66861
>
> --- Comment #3 from Janne Blomqvist --- Or rather,
> also fixing another similar potential issu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66861
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Emrich ---
(In reply to Janne Blomqvist from comment #3)
> Or rather, also fixing another similar potential issue, you might instead
> want to test this:
>
> diff --git a/libgfortran/io/unix.c b/libgfortran/io/unix.c
>
c
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Target Milestone: ---
When configured using --enabled-host-s
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Target Milestone: ---
Trying to bootstrap trunk revision 227003 using build configuration
bootstrap-lto and ada enabled fails with an ICE in stage 2 while linking gnat1.
/opt/devel/SCRATCH/tmp.Gw2rTvUmtk/gcc-6.0.0-test
NCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Building cross x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu to i686-pc-cygwin:
libtool: compile: /SCRATCH/tmp.uPE4kUseBu/gcc-4.5.3/gcc-4.5.3/./gcc/xg
Priority: P3
Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Building cross x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu to i686-pc-cygwin:
/SCRATCH/tmp.jYKMdkdWc2/gcc-4.7.0/gcc-4.7.0/./gcc/xgcc
-B/SCRATCH/tmp.jYKMdkdWc2/gcc-4.7.0/gcc-4.7.0/./gcc/
-B/opt
iority: P3
Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de
Building cross x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu to i686-pc-mingw32:
/SCRATCH/tmp.yK829Id1E6/gcc-4.6.1/gcc-4.6.1/./gcc/xgcc
-B/SCRATCH/tmp.yK829Id1E6/gcc-4.6.1/gcc-4.6.1/./gcc/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48710
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Emrich 2011-04-21
14:36:12 UTC ---
This is rev. 172660
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Emrich 2011-07-13
16:16:09 UTC ---
It's the same for a native i686-pc-mingw32 bootstrap using msys.
See also PR 49625 and 48151, which are duplicates.
A patch is proposed here http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-09/msg0022
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Emrich 2011-07-13
16:22:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> It's the same for a native i686-pc-mingw32 bootstrap using msys.
>
> See also PR 49625 and 48151, which are duplicates.
>
> A patch is proposed here http:/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
Rainer Emrich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
--- Comment #10 from Rainer Emrich 2011-07-14
22:02:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > Thanks for reporting the problem and tracking down the fix.
>
> Now I get:
>
> g-socthi.adb:280:01: (style) horizontal tab no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
--- Comment #11 from Rainer Emrich 2011-07-14
22:08:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > (In reply to comment #8)
> > > Thanks for reporting the problem and tracking down the fix.
> >
> > Now I get:
> >
> > g-soct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
--- Comment #12 from Rainer Emrich 2011-07-14
22:16:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > (In reply to comment #9)
> > > (In reply to comment #8)
> > > > Thanks for reporting the problem and tracking down the fix.
>
101 - 188 of 188 matches
Mail list logo
